Ethernet and other communications protocols that were once used only in Local Area Network (“LAN”) environments are now being used in Metropolitan Area Networks (“MANs”) and Wide Area Networks (“WANs”). One reason for this development is that Enterprises and other customers of communications Service Providers find it convenient to operate, end-to-end, in an environment which is native to their LANs and understood by their IT professionals. However, the extension of such protocols to environments in which they were not originally intended presents some problems.
One problem is that a single failure can trigger a cascade of alarms that overwhelm an NMS/OSS. A single node or link in a WAN, for example, is likely to support many more different services than a LAN device. Each supported service may also rely on a greater number of network nodes between endpoints. If an intermediate node or link fails, an alarm is generated for each failed service. However, the other network nodes that support those services also generate alarms. Hence, in comparison to operation on a LAN, an overwhelming number of alarms can be generated as a result of a single failure.
Another problem is fault localization. In the case where communications services require use of the networks of multiple different service providers, for example, service faults may trigger provisions in Service Level Agreements (“SLAs”), which are contracts between different service providers, and also between service providers and their customers. An enterprise customer or service provider may be entitled to a credit, or invocation of a service cancellation clause, depending on the cause, frequency and duration of faults. It is therefore desirable to have technology to produce accurate, perhaps auditable, notification regarding a service fault. The notification may also include an indication of the cause of the fault and fault localization information.